11% excise tax

[The Gleam]

I think this will have the opposite of its intended purpose. Because of the extraneos fees, DROS, county tax, and now excise tax, many people now have an even larger incentive to "buy off the books"

Or make off the books.... now where did I put that shovel?

😏

---

[sigfan91]

I think this will have the opposite of its intended purpose. Because of the extraneos fees, DROS, county tax, and now excise tax, many people now have an even larger incentive to "buy off the books"

Money was never the intended purpose.

[BrokerB]

I still have a receipt that I paid for ammo tax when I had a gift card from Bass Pro Shops the guy told me to hold on to it maybe I'll get my money back..hahahah

[Jimi Jah]

With 11% accepted there is no reason not to double it to 22%.

[fred40]

"Disproportionately affects poor and black people"
That's all needed to kill a rule or law if Democrats say it.

Or a Republican just needs to say “I love that law..now blacks and mexicans won’t buy guns to kill people” play reverse psychology on their azzez

[TrappedinCalifornia]

The most fascinating thing about this illegal 11% tax is that there has been no meaningful opposition to it from 2nd Amendment rights organizations, gun owners/buyers, as well as dealers - in general.

A lot of bitching, but no real fight. The apathy has lead to atrophy.

While it's shocking this was passed after similar proposed legislation was fought off more than 6 previous times a bill seeking to add an extra 10% tax or fee on firearms/ammo was introduced in the past - it's more shocking that there was so little response to fight it while as a bill, but worse that the response to it since it became law has been so anemic.

---

Back in October, Michel & Associates put out a statement saying, in part...

...Challenging a tax is legally more complex than a straightforward constitutional challenge. The state threw every procedural hurdle imaginable in our way to protect this tax. The bureaucrats and gun-control politicians believe that if they make gun ownership more expensive, fewer people will exercise their rights.

We refused to back down. We fought, endured, and cleared all of the legal procedural obstacles the state threw at us. Now, the case challenging California’s 11% excise tax is back on track—and moving full speed ahead. CRPA, Michel & Associates, and our partners are fully committed to getting this tax struck down...

We cannot do this alone. We need your support to turn back this assault on our Second Amendment rights. Every contribution helps us continue the fight in court and ensures we can hold California accountable for this overreach...

Here is the case status... Jaymes v. Maduros (Poway Weapons & Gear, Inc. v. CDTFA)

...Accordingly, to reanimate the administrative appeal refund process stayed by the Department, Plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed a previously filed suit challenging AB 28 on constitutional grounds in the Superior Court for the County of San Diego. Jaymes v. Maduros, No. 37-2024-00031147-CU-MC-CTL (Mar. 19, 2025). The Court entered dismissal on April 1, 2025...

From March of last year...

My suspicion is that it was the old tried and true rationale of not fighting it as a bill because it was considered a 'given' that it would pass, this time. No one realistically thought it would come down to a quick victory for 'our side.' However, one of the concerns some have expressed is that it is or will become another one of those 'money raising' opportunities for both sides. Personally, I tend to 'trust' Michel & Associates; but, like you, it would be nice to hear/see some actual forward progress being made.

In the end, I don't think it's so much 'atrophy' as it is bucking an extremely stacked deck.

[The Gleam]

Darrell Issa is involved in this bill:

https://hudson.house.gov/press-relea...es-on-firearms

I've been aware of that bill and have even posted about it here on Calguns in the past - but so much damage will be realized here in CA long before that Federal bill ever provides impact, and I'm sure we'll never see 'rebates' or 'repatriation.

All ironically as Newsom is calling for rebates from the tariffs reversed by SCROTUS under IEEPA, or free money for blacks who were never desendants of slaves, nor with CA ever having been a participant to slavery trades in the first place.

---

[morrcarr67]

The most fascinating thing about this illegal 11% tax is that there has been no meaningful opposition to it from 2nd Amendment rights organizations, gun owners/buyers, as well as dealers - in general.

A lot of bitching, but no real fight. The apathy has lead to atrophy.

While it's shocking this was passed after similar proposed legislation was fought off more than 6 previous times a bill seeking to add an extra 10% tax or fee on firearms/ammo was introduced in the past - it's more shocking that there was so little response to fight it while as a bill, but worse that the response to it since it became law has been so anemic.

---

They seem to be going a different route, though they should also go through the court route IMHO.

The "Freedom from Unfair Gun Taxes Act" (S. 1169/H.R. 943), introduced in 2025 by Rep. Richard Hudson and Sen. Jim Risch, proposes to prohibit states from imposing special excise taxes on firearms and ammunition. This legislation aims to prevent states from adding financial burdens on gun ownership, specifically targeting taxes used to fund gun control programs.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/1169/all-info

Darrell Issa is involved in this bill: https://hudson.house.gov/press-relea...es-on-firearms

[The Gleam]

The most fascinating thing about this illegal 11% tax is that there has been no meaningful opposition to it from 2nd Amendment rights organizations, gun owners/buyers, as well as dealers - in general.

A lot of bitching, but no real fight. The apathy has lead to atrophy.

While it's shocking this was passed after similar proposed legislation was fought off more than 6 previous times a bill seeking to add an extra 10% tax or fee on firearms/ammo was introduced in the past - it's more shocking that there was so little response to fight it while as a bill, but worse that the response to it since it became law has been so anemic.

---

[abinsinia]

Makes sense that the sellers should not disclose the price of the item. What happens if it's a gift or something ?

[lodicollector]

I think this will have the opposite of its intended purpose. Because of the extraneos fees, DROS, county tax, and now excise tax, many people now have an even larger incentive to "buy off the books"

[dadoy]

If you are buying ammunition with an FFL03/COE and then consuming it yourself, you are obligated to pay the appropriate sales tax when you file your state tax return, unless the tax was collected by the seller you got it from. In situations like this, a personal income tax accountant mississauga could help clarify reporting obligations, especially if you’re unsure how different taxes interact. I'm not exactly sure how this relates with the FET, but I would just keep your mouth shut and hope for the best. Most likely the tax will be due, but the question is, what would the enforcement mechanism be.


As for implementation of the tax, most of the recent commenters would be well suited to go back and read the posts earlier in the thread. Sales tax law is very clear that the tax is levied at the time of delivery of the goods. FET will be the same and will be remitted to CDTFA, just like sales tax. When you "buy" a gun, you are essentially just placing a deposit on the product until it is delivered, at which point the final sale is made and the tax collected per the rate in force on that day. This isn't rocket surgery, but it is understandable that the average layperson does not know how this works. Bottom line, don't get pissed at your FFL, big or small, if you have to pay the tax on something DELIVERED on July 1st or after.

Yes, it’s likely used gun prices would rise. When an additional tax is introduced, sellers often adjust prices to offset the added cost, and overall market prices tend to reflect the higher total cost to buyers.

[Deelayed]

It is a repugnant law. Portantino and his ilk should swing from a gallows.

I'll bring the wax you bring the Rope

[NikePenguin]

CHAPTER 3. Exemptions

36021.

[Zenderfall]

What possible moral case can be made to exempt a class of citizen (active or retired LEOs in this case) from a tax on goods acquired for their own personal possession?